5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Differences in prescribed Kt/V and delivered haemodialysis dose--why obesity makes a difference to survival for haemodialysis patients when using a 'one size fits all' Kt/V target

      Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Morbid obesity is reported to be a survival factor for haemodialysis patients compared with those with a normal body mass index (BMI), yet morbid obesity (BMI >35) is a mortality risk factor for obese patients in the general population. Traditionally, haemodialysis dosing is prescribed to achieve a target Kt/V corrected for total body water (TBW). As obese patients typically have increased body fat, which contains less water than muscle, then obese patients may have lower levels of body water than their slimmer counterparts, and as such delivered Kt/V could be greater than that estimated using standard anthropomorphic equations, and so increased dialysis dose may help explain the increased survival reported for obese patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Association of estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in general population cohorts: a collaborative meta-analysis.

          Substantial controversy surrounds the use of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria to define chronic kidney disease and assign its stages. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the independent and combined associations of eGFR and albuminuria with mortality. In this collaborative meta-analysis of general population cohorts, we pooled standardised data for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality from studies containing at least 1000 participants and baseline information about eGFR and urine albumin concentrations. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality associated with eGFR and albuminuria, adjusted for potential confounders. The analysis included 105,872 participants (730,577 person-years) from 14 studies with urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) measurements and 1,128,310 participants (4,732,110 person-years) from seven studies with urine protein dipstick measurements. In studies with ACR measurements, risk of mortality was unrelated to eGFR between 75 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 105 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and increased at lower eGFRs. Compared with eGFR 95 mL/min/1.73 m(2), adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.18 (95% CI 1.05-1.32) for eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 1.57 (1.39-1.78) for 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2), and 3.14 (2.39-4.13) for 15 mL/min/1.73 m(2). ACR was associated with risk of mortality linearly on the log-log scale without threshold effects. Compared with ACR 0.6 mg/mmol, adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.20 (1.15-1.26) for ACR 1.1 mg/mmol, 1.63 (1.50-1.77) for 3.4 mg/mmol, and 2.22 (1.97-2.51) for 33.9 mg/mmol. eGFR and ACR were multiplicatively associated with risk of mortality without evidence of interaction. Similar findings were recorded for cardiovascular mortality and in studies with dipstick measurements. eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and ACR 1.1 mg/mmol (10 mg/g) or more are independent predictors of mortality risk in the general population. This study provides quantitative data for use of both kidney measures for risk assessment and definition and staging of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), US National Kidney Foundation, and Dutch Kidney Foundation. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux in maintenance hemodialysis.

            The effects of the dose of dialysis and the level of flux of the dialyzer membrane on mortality and morbidity among patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis are uncertain. We undertook a randomized clinical trial in 1846 patients undergoing thrice-weekly dialysis, using a two-by-two factorial design to assign patients randomly to a standard or high dose of dialysis and to a low-flux or high-flux dialyzer. In the standard-dose group, the mean (+/-SD) urea-reduction ratio was 66.3+/-2.5 percent, the single-pool Kt/V was 1.32+/-0.09, and the equilibrated Kt/V was 1.16+/-0.08; in the high-dose group, the values were 75.2+/-2.5 percent, 1.71+/-0.11, and 1.53+/-0.09, respectively. Flux, estimated on the basis of beta2-microglobulin clearance, was 3+/-7 ml per minute in the low-flux group and 34+/-11 ml per minute in the high-flux group. The primary outcome, death from any cause, was not significantly influenced by the dose or flux assignment: the relative risk of death in the high-dose group as compared with the standard-dose group was 0.96 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.10; P=0.53), and the relative risk of death in the high-flux group as compared with the low-flux group was 0.92 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.05; P=0.23). The main secondary outcomes (first hospitalization for cardiac causes or death from any cause, first hospitalization for infection or death from any cause, first 15 percent decrease in the serum albumin level or death from any cause, and all hospitalizations not related to vascular access) also did not differ significantly between either the dose groups or the flux groups. Possible benefits of the dose or flux interventions were suggested in two of seven prespecified subgroups of patients. Patients undergoing hemodialysis thrice weekly appear to have no major benefit from a higher dialysis dose than that recommended by current U.S. guidelines or from the use of a high-flux membrane. Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Second generation logarithmic estimates of single-pool variable volume Kt/V: an analysis of error.

              The original formula proposed to estimate variable-volume single-pool (VVSP) Kt/V was Kt/V = -In(R - 0.008 * t - f * UF/W), where in the Kt/V range of 0.7 to 1.3, f = 1.0 (* denotes multiplication). This formula tends to overestimate Kt/V as the Kt/V increases above 1.3. Because higher Kt/V values are now commonly delivered, the validity of both the urea generation term (0.008 * f) and correction for UF/W were explored by solving VVSP equations for simulated hemodialysis situations, with Kt/V ranging from 0.6 to 2.6. The analysis led to the development of a second-generation formula, namely: Kt/V = -In(R - 0.008 * t) + (4-3.5 * R) * UF/W. The first and second generation formulas were then used to estimate the modeled VVSP Kt/V in 500 modeling sessions in which the Kt/V ranged widely from 0.7 to 2.1. An analysis of error showed that this second-generation formula eliminated the overestimation of Kt/V in the high ranges found with the first-generation formula. Also, total error (absolute value percent error + 2 SD) was reduced with the second-generation formula. These results led to the proposal of a new formula that can be used for a very wide range of delivered Kt/V.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
                Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0931-0509
                1460-2385
                October 31 2013
                November 01 2013
                June 19 2013
                November 01 2013
                : 28
                : suppl 4
                : iv219-iv223
                Article
                10.1093/ndt/gft237
                23787543
                e829012b-b081-406e-874c-51d5ab423f65
                © 2013
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article